USA v. Alexis Arevalo


UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED. [16-20112 Affirmed] Judge: TMR, Judge: PRO, Judge: JWE. Mandate pull date is 05/23/2017 for Appellant Alexis Geovani Arevalo [16-20112]

Download PDF
Case: 16-20112 Document: 00513976014 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/02/2017 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 16-20112 Summary Calendar United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED May 2, 2017 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee v. ALEXIS GEOVANI AREVALO, also known as Alexis Arevalo, also known as Alexis Giovani Escobar Arevalo, Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 4:15-CR-501-1 Before REAVLEY, OWEN, and ELROD, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Alexis Geovani Arevalo appeals his 35-month prison sentence for illegally reentering the United States after deportation following a felony conviction, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b)(1). The district court applied a 16-level enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(ii) (2015) Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. * Case: 16-20112 Document: 00513976014 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/02/2017 No. 16-20112 because Arevalo’s prior deportation occurred after a felony conviction for a crime of violence, namely, Texas burglary of a habitation. Arevalo argues that in light of Mathis v. United States, 136 S. Ct. 2243 (2016), the Texas burglary statute is not divisible and is overbroad. This argument is foreclosed. United States v. Uribe, 838 F.3d 667 (5th Cir. 2016), cert. denied, 2017 WL 661924 (Mar. 20, 2017) (No. 16-7969). In addition, Arevalo argues for the first time on appeal that the state court record submitted in the district court did not show that he was convicted under the subsection of the Texas burglary statute that supports such an enhancement, Texas Penal Code § 30.02(a)(1). We review this issue for plain error. See United States v. Herrera-Alvarez, 753 F.3d 132, 135-36 (5th Cir. 2014). The supplemental record shows that there was no error, plain or otherwise. See United States v. Fernandez-Cusco, 447 F.3d 382, 386-88 (5th Cir. 2006). AFFIRMED. 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?